Advertisement

Comparison of macular findings due to vitreomacular traction alone or in association with epiretinal membrane

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate the anatomical and functional findings in patients with vitreomacular traction (VMT) alone or in combination with epiretinal membrane (ERM).

Methods

In this retrospective, cross-sectional study, we studied 102 patients with VMT, either alone (n = 37) or combined with ERM (n = 65). All patients were examined with spectral-domain optical coherence tomography (SD-OCT). We recorded the vitreofoveal angle of VMT nasally and temporally, the horizontal diameter of VMT, macular thickness, the presence, type, and location of macular edema, the ellipsoid zone (ΕΖ)/external limiting membrane (ELM) status, and the visual acuity.

Results

Patients with VMT combined with ERM presented smaller vitreofoveal angle nasally and temporally, broader adhesion diameter, and a greater extent of EZ defect compared to patients with VMT alone, although there was no statistically significant difference in EZ and ELM condition regarding the number of affected cases. There is also no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups concerning the visual acuity. In the majority of patients with VMT alone, cystoid macular edema was present mainly at the foveal area. In cases where VMT coexisted with ERM, macular edema was mostly found to be diffuse, while cystoid or mixed type, extending to the whole macular area, was also present.

Conclusions

Patients with VMT in association with ERM have different characteristics in SD-OCT compared to those with VMT alone regarding the type and location of macular edema, the extent of EZ defect, as well as the vitreofoveal angle and the VMT diameter. Moreover, they presented worse visual acuity compared to those with VMT alone, although the difference did not reach statistical significance.

Eur J Ophthalmol 2017; 27(1): 86 - 92

Article Type: ORIGINAL RESEARCH ARTICLE

DOI:10.5301/ejo.5000807

Authors

Irini Chatziralli, George Theodossiadis, Vlassis Grigoropoulos, Ioannis Datseris, Alexandros Chatzirallis, Panagiotis Theodossiadis

Article History

Disclosures

Financial support: No financial support was received for this submission.
Conflict of interest: None of the authors has conflict of interest with this submission.

This article is available as full text PDF.

  • If you are a Subscriber, please log in now.

  • Article price: Eur 36,00
  • You will be granted access to the article for 72 hours and you will be able to download any format (PDF or ePUB). The article will be available in your login area under "My PayPerView". You will need to register a new account (unless you already own an account with this journal), and you will be guided through our online shop. Online purchases are paid by Credit Card through PayPal.
  • If you are not a Subscriber you may:
  • Subscribe to this journal
  • Unlimited access to all our archives, 24 hour a day, every day of the week.

Authors

Affiliations

  • 2nd Department of Ophthalmology, University of Athens, Attikon Hospital, Athens - Greece
  • 2nd Department of Ophthalmology, Henry Dunant Hospital, Athens - Greece
  • OMMA Ophthalmological Institute, Athens - Greece

Article usage statistics

The blue line displays unique views in the time frame indicated.
The yellow line displays unique downloads.
Views and downloads are counted only once per session.

No supplementary material is available for this article.